Adivasis in India have experienced a narrowing space to identify themselves religiously as people outside the fold of major religions in India. The Sarna Dharma movement demands recognition of the Sarna religion in the Indian census and has gained strength in recent years.
Problems and Purpose
Adivasis (original inhabitants in Sanskrit) have not been able to indicate their religion in the census since Indian Independence in 1947. Until 2011 they could indicate their religion under ‘Other’ in the census (Markam 2019). In 2016 the Union government of India dropped the ‘Other’ category from the census, meaning that Adivasis would need to identify themselves under the religions listed in the census which include Hinduism, Islam, Sikhism, Christianity, Buddhism, and Jainism. While Adivasi groups had been demanding the recognition of Sarna as a religion of the Adivasis for a while, this demand became stronger after 2016 (Alam and Nayak 2023). This demand has been opposed by powerful actors who propagate Hindutva such as the Rashtriya Swayam Sevak (RSS) who perceive Adivasis to be a part of the Hindu fold (Jha 2022; Karketta 2023). The demand for a separate code that mentions Sarna Dharma (Sarna order) as an option has been present for more than a decade. In 2011, the National Committee for Scheduled Tribes had suggested this additional code (Oraon 2023). Now this demand has gained strength, and the state government of Jharkhand has passed a bill seeking the addition of a Sarna religion code and the bill has been sent to the Union Government. The Chief Minister of Jharkhand in 2023 was an Adivasi and wrote a letter to the Prime Minister noting the importance for Sarna code for Adivasi identity and cultural preservation. The Union government has not yet agreed to add this code (Fritsch 2024). The Jharkhand government was hoping to add the code in time for the 2021 census but due to COVID-19, the census was postponed until further notice.
Background History and Context
Between 1871 and 1931, the British census used to categorise the tribal population of India as ‘aboriginal’, and under religion they could indicate ‘Animism’. After India gained freedom in 1947, the next census replaced the ‘Animism’ option with ‘Other’. So Adivasis could indicate ‘Other’ to mark their religion. From the 1970s onwards a dominant tribal group named Santhal started identifying themselves as ‘Sarna’ which refers to a place of worship: the sacred groves of the Sal tree in Santhali and Oraon (languages spoken by the groups Santhal and Oraon). In the 1971 census, 300,000 people identified themselves as of Sarna religion. In the 1980s the demand for the creation of the Sarna code was made for the first time by MP Kartik Oraon. By 1991 the number of people identifying as Sarnas had increased to 1,800,000 people. Newspaper reports suggest that in the 2011 census, 5,000,000 people identified as Sarna by listing themselves under the ‘Other’ category and noting Sarna as their identity (Bhargava 2022). Multiple tribes identified themselves as Sarnas, including Mundas, Santhals, Oraon, Lohar, Bhumji among various others.
While the number of people listing themselves as Sarnas in the census helped grow the movement, another factor was the demarcation of the new state of Jharkhand in 2000, a state which mainly consists of Adivasis. There is a significant presence of Sarnas in the state of Jharkhand in central India. The demand for a separate state for Jharkhand in the classification of states in 1951 was denied because of the multiple languages spoken in the region and the classification of states was being conducted on a linguistic basis. In 2000 when Jharkhand was carved out of the state of Bihar, the political strength of claims on a separate religion for Adivasis increased (Fritsch 2024).
Methods and Tools Used
The demand for a Sarna religion code has been made on the streets, in the legislative assemblies, Parliament, and outside government offices. The group at the forefront of the current movement is called the Adivasi Sengel Abhiyan (ASA) which loosely translates to tribal empowerment campaign. ASA has organised people across states like Assam, Jharkhand, Bihar, Odisha, West Bengal, Tripura, and Arunachal Pradesh to demand the Sarna Dharma code. They have mobilised for protests including in the capital city of Delhi and have blocked trains (Alam and Nayak 2023). They also threatened to boycott the 2021 census and to engage in non-violent protest if the code was not approved before the census (Xalxo 2020). By using threats aimed at the government and pushing for legislative changes, it used the sandwich strategy of applying pressure and resisting the denial of freedom of religious self-identification. More recently they shouted the slogan ‘Code nahin toh vote nahin’ (No Code, No Vote) before the 2024 general elections took place. Furthermore, they highlighted the relevance of Sarna belief in current periods of climate change and pollution. Sarnas pray to Jal, Jungle, Zamin (Water, Forest, Land) which fosters a worldview that looks to protect the environment (Oraon 2023). They also used strategic essentialism since there are an estimated 83 religions within Adivasis and not all all Adivasis believe in Sarna religion. So Adivasi groups from 19 states coming together to demand a Sarna code demonstrates an agreement between the these different groups to be clubbed as one for their goal of having the option of differentiating themselves from other religions (Markam 2019).
Influence, Outcomes, and Effects
The outcome of the demand for a Sarna religious code is uncertain since the BJP-led Union government has not approved the Jharkhand bill for the new religious code. However, this movement has led to much public discussion of the demand, alliance building among several different movements and groups across states of India have mobilised in support of the demand and protests have been organised in the capital city of Delhi. Very importantly, this demand has made it an electoral issue with regional parties in Jharkhand including the Chief Minister Hemant Soren supporting this code, the state legislative assembly passing the bill to create the code unanimously and national parties competing at the state-level joining the debate on the proposed new code.
Analysis and Lessons Learned
Since this is an ongoing movement with very limited academic studies on it, the analysis of the movement requires more data and time to allow for a retrospective view of the movement. Some observations of this movement are that there are few challenges this movement faces, one is the current political climate in India where hindi (language), Hindu (religion) and Hindustan (land) are the focus of the BJP, suggesting the recognition of another religion will be met with backlash (Fritsch 2024; Karketta 2023). This is particularly so because members of the Sangh Parivar (the larger family of Hindu nationalist organisations) have historically called Adivasi (first inhabitants) as Vanvasi (Forest inhabitants) not supporting the idea that Adivasis were there before other groups. They also viewed them as a part of the Hindu fold, with deep suspicion towards Christian missionaries who are perceived to be converting them to Christianity. So a step towards a separate religious code for Sarnas goes against the worldview and activities of the Sangh Parivar. The second challenge they face is how they are scattered across multiple states and only politically strong in the state of Jharkhand The third challenge could be that despite the use of strategic essentialism and diverse groups of Adivasis demanding a code for Sarna, there could be other Adivasi groups who are not campaigning for this code who might want a different code for their own Adivasi religion.
One of the biggest wins of this movement has been the Sarna Dharm code being passed at the state legislative assembly and a formal request being sent to the union government to add this code. One of the reasons for this success could be that Jharkhand is a state for Adivasis and the Chief Minister was himself an Adivasi which allows for better representation of Adivasi concerns. Other potential reasons for this success could be the mobilisation of actors across 19 states for protests, threats of boycotting the census.
Research Ethics
This case was based on secondary data and followed the ethical guidelines developed by the members of Participedia Signature Project on Indigenous Innovations in Democratic Representation. This required a form of process tracing of the secondary sources to ensure a fair representation of Indigenous sources and voices in the development of the case. To comply with the protocol to the greatest degree possible, this case relies as much as possible on researchers and journalists who identify as Adivasis either in the article or on other platforms. Additionally, wherever the source was written by someone of potentially non-adivasi background, the texts were only cited for facts regarding government figures and bureaucratic history. Since there are very limited scholarly articles on the subject of which none of them clearly indicate their positionality, their relations with those demanding a Sarna code and the involvement of Adivasis in the research, this case does not rely much on them unless necessary (see Alam and Nayak 2023; Fritsch 2024).
While one cannot determine accountability towards Adivasis purely on the basis of Adivasi authorship of the text, concerns over representation of Adivasis could be partly addressed by having Adivasi authors. Additionally the four journalistic pieces authored by self-identified Adivasis had other characteristics which suggested non-extractive data collection and claims of representation. However three of the four texts cited for this case which are authored by Adivasis were from platforms which are run by Adivasis (such as Adivasi Lives Matter and Round Table India) or have strict ethical guidelines involving do-no-harm policies, dignity in coverage, informed consent (such as People’s Archive of Rural India). I could not gauge the ethics guidelines for the third platform, The Wire, however the author is themselves an Adivasi and speak on Adivasi issues on public platforms.
References
Alam, S. and Nayak, K.V. (2023) “‘Sarna Adivasi’ Religion Code: Contextualizing Religious Identity of Tribals in India,” in Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Sustainable Development, CRC Press
Bhargava, K. (2022) “Explained: What Is The Sarna Religious Code And What Are Its Followers Demanding?,” Outlook, , https://www.outlookindia.com/national/explained-what-is-the-sarna-religious-code-and-what-are-its-followers-demanding--news-230860 (accessed February 27, 2024)
Fritsch, M. (2024) “Negotiating Adivasi Agency: The Sarna Dharam Code in Jharkhand, India”
Jha, D.K. (2022) “Why the Adivasi demand for the Sarna code rattles the RSS,” The Caravan, , https://caravanmagazine.in/politics/rss-sarna-code-jharkhand-adivasi (accessed February 27, 2024)
Karketta, J. (2023) “Two gods, two stairways, four donation boxes,” People’s Archive of Rural India, blog, 24 August, https://ruralindiaonline.org/en/articles/two-gods-two-stairways-four-donation-boxes/ (accessed June 2, 2024)
Markam, S. (2019) “Why Adivasis Are Demanding Recognition for Their Religions,” The Wire, , https://thewire.in/rights/adivasi-religion-recognition-census (accessed June 2, 2024)
Oraon, D. (2023) “Demand for Sarna code by Adivasis,” Adivasi Lives Matter, blog, 27 March, https://www.adivasilivesmatter.com/post/demand-of-sarna-code-by-adivasi (accessed June 2, 2024)
Xalxo, N. (2020) “Tribals Boycott Census and National Population Register (NPR),” Round Table India, blog, 2 March, https://www.roundtableindia.co.in/tribals-boycott-census-and-national-population-register-npr/ (accessed June 3, 2024)
